and traded with them, and made other fi ve talents. In like manner he that had received

the two gained18 other two.' As each had received according to his ability, so each

worked according to his power, as good and faithful servants of their Lord. If the

outward result was different, their labour, devotion, and faithfulness were equal. It was

otherwise with him who had least to do for his Master, since only one talent had been

entrusted to him. He 'went away, digged up earth, and hid the money of his Lord.' The

prominent fact here is, that he did not employ it for the Master, as a good servant, but

shunned alike the labour and the responsibility, and acted as if it had been some

stranger's, and not his Lord's property. In so doing he was not only unfaithful to his trust,

but practically disowned that he was a servant who had received much, two others are

introduced in the Parable, who had both received comparatively little - one of whom was

faithful, while the other in idle selfishness hid the money, not heeding that it as 'his

Lord's.' Thus, while the second servant, although less had been entrusted to him was as

faithful and conscientious as he to whom much had been given, and while both had, by

their gain, increased the possessions of their Master, the third had by his conduct

rendered the money of his Lord a dead, useless, buried thing.

And now the second scene opens. 'But after a long time cometh the Lord of those

servants, a nd maketh reckoning  19 with them.' The notice of the long absence of the

Master not only connects this with the Parable of the Ten Virgins, but is intended to

show that the delay might have rendered the servants who traded more careless, while

it also increased the guilt of him, who all this time had not done anything with his

Master's money. And now the first of the servants, without speaking of his labour in

trading, or his merit in 'making' money, answers with simple joyousness: 'Lord, five

talents delive redst Thou unto me. See, other five talents have I gained besides.'20 We

can almost see his honest face beaming with delight, as he points to his Master's

increased possession. His approval was all that the faithful servant had looked for, for

which he had toiled during that long absence. And we can understand, how the Master

welcomed and owned that servant, and assigned to him meet reward. The latter was

twofold. Having proved his faithfulness and capacity in a comparatively limited sphere,

one much greate r would be assigned to him. For, to do the work, and increase the

wealth of his Master, had evidently been his joy and privilege, as well as his duty.

Hence also the second part of his reward - that of entering into the joy of his Lord - must

not be confined to sharing in the festive meal at His return, still less to advancement

from the position of a servant to that of a friend who shares his Master's lordship. It

implies far more than this: even satisfied heart-sympathy with the aims and gains of his

Master, and participation in them, with all that thus conveys.